Most Christian teaching
acknowledges that Jesus was (and is!) a Prophet, Priest, and King. 1
However, few seem to understand the implications of what those titles mean. This
article focuses on the role of Jesus Christ as high priest. Christ was not from
the tribe of Levi, the tribe designated by God to serve. From Levi the family of
Aaron was chosen to serve as priests at the Tabernacle. Jesus was from the tribe
of Judah. So, how was He designated to be high priest? Why is He high
priest? What does He do as high priest on our behalf? This article
will explain. To understand Christ’s role as high priest it is important to know
where to find the answers. The Book of Hebrews is the source for most of them.
First, we need to examine basic background information from the Old Testament
and the Gospels to help us understand “Christ as High Priest.”

What Is a Priest?

“A
priest is one who is duly authorized to minister in sacred things, particularly
to offer sacrifices at the altar, and who acts as mediator between men and
God.”

The Levites
were the tribe of Israel designated by God to serve the other tribes. They had
specific functions to perform, some of which were:

“And that you may put
difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean; And that you
may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which YHWH has spoken unto
them by the hand of Moses.”

• Leviticus 10:10–11

The
Levites were selected to teach Israel the Law of God given through Moses. From
the tribe of Levi, God selected the family of Aaron to serve in the Tabernacle
(and later in the Temple) to perform the ritual sacrifices and other duties in
the Law of Moses at designated times and places (Exodus 28:1; Numbers 28:1–2). 3

A priest therefore serves
the people, performing ritual acts and religious rites on their behalf to a
deity, most often within a sanctified site or temple of some kind. The Levitical
priests of Israel had four characteristics; a priest was (1) chosen of God,
(2) the property of God, (3) holy to God, and (4) he offered gifts to God, and
received gifts from God in return. 4
At the top of the hierarchy of the Levitical-Aaronic priesthood was the high
priest of Israel who was chosen to that position.

“For every high priest
taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God,
that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices
for sins: Who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are
out of the way [those who are straying];
for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And by reason hereof he
ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. And no man
takes this [priestly] honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.”

• Hebrews 5:1–4

Messiah as High
Priest?

In the time of Christ there
was an expectation in some quarters that the coming Messiah, besides being a
prophet and a king, would also be an anointed priest. As Christians, we know
that the Messiah is a priest because it is openly stated to be so in the Book of
Hebrews. Direct evidence of the priestly aspect of the Messiah outside of
Hebrews has been somewhat lacking in the past, but now that may be changing.

Evidence for an expected
priestly Messiah has been enhanced in a short paper presented at the November
2008 meeting of the Society for Biblical Literature by Brant Pitre titled “Jesus
and the Messianic Priesthood.” It was from a chapter from his forthcoming
book, Jesus and the Last Supper: Judaism and the Origin of the Eucharist. His paper consisted of quotes from scholarly, biblical, and Jewish
sources, including several Dead Sea Scrolls references. They show that
expectations of a Messianic priesthood were more developed than was previously
supposed. Pitre also gave some new information on how Jesus fulfilled those
expectations by His actions during His ministry. Some sources and concepts I use
will be ones that Pitre brought forth.

It is clear from the
Gospels that Jesus did not perform any ritual duties as a priest at the
Jerusalem Temple. He was not a Levitical priest. His priestly service and
example were recognized only after His resurrection and came through His life
and ministry. His true ritual service as a priest was performed in heaven
one time only (Romans 6:10; Hebrews 7:27, 9:12, 10:9–10). His physical priestly
service was demonstrated by:

His sinless life,

His signs and miracles,

His fulfillment of prophecies,

His righteousness,

His being the living sacrifice, “the Lamb of God,”

His resurrection from the dead, and

His ritual application of His own “blood of the Lamb” on the altar in
heaven. 5

Many of Christ’s deeds in
hindsight were in fact priestly acts — but without regard to the Levitical
priesthood or its rituals. It was for another priesthood that He acted, the
priesthood “after the
order of Melchizedec.”

Without doubt Christ Jesus
is a priest, and He is a priest at this moment. In fact, He is a “high
priest,” a title that ideally should be translated “Chief Priest.” While Jesus
was not called a high priest in the New Testament until the Book of Hebrews was
written about 61 AD, there were indications in the Gospels that demonstrated His
status as the priestly Messiah. For example, when He was on trial before the
Sanhedrin the high priest asked Him a direct question, Jesus answered by quoting
a significant Scripture passage:

“Again the high priest
asked him, and said unto him, ‘Are you the Christ [the Messiah],
the Son of the Blessed?’ And Jesus said, ‘I am’: and you shall see the
Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of
heaven.’

… the high priest rent
his clothes, and said, ‘What need we any further witnesses? You have heard the
blasphemy: what think you? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.”

• Mark 14:61–64(cf. Matthew 26:63–66; Luke 22:66–71)

Why did the high priest react that way? What upset him and the other
members of the Sanhedrin? First of all they were threatened by His
popularity with the people. And they were upset because Jesus made a clear
scriptural reference obvious to everyone present at the trial. They reacted so
strongly that the high priest cried “blasphemy” and they all voted to put
Him to death. 6
Jesus quoted a portion of Psalm 110 which talks about one
individual who is both a king and a high priest. Oscar Cullmann explains
(via Pitre):

“When Jesus answers the high priest in Mark 14:62, he combines a
reference to Daniel 7 with the reference to Psalm 110: ‘You will see the Son of
Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven’ ‘Sitting at the right hand’
is inseparably connected with the thought of the
priest-king after the order of Melchizedek.

Is it not
significant that Jesus applies to himself a saying about the eternal
High Priest precisely when he stands before the Jewish high priestand is questioned by him concerning his claim to be the Messiah? He says
in effect that his messiahship is not that of an earthly messiah ... but that he is the heavenly Son of Man and the heavenly High Priest.”

Just as
Jesus acknowledged before Pilate (see footnote 1 above, John 18:36–37)
that He was born to be a king, Jesus admitted before the high priest that He was
indeed the expected Messiah, the Son of Man (“I
am”),
but He went further and indicated that He was a heavenly high priest by
quoting Psalm 110. That being the case, in what way could
Jesus have been a high priest? He could not have been a Levitical priest because
He was not from the tribe of Levi:

“For he of whom these
things are spoken pertain to another tribe [of Israel],
of which no man gave attendance at the
altar. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda [Judah]; of which tribe
Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood.”

• Hebrews 7:13–14

No
one from the tribe of Judah had any claim to the priesthood in Israel within the
Law of Moses.

Jesus’ Citation of Psalm 110 in the
Temple

Earlier in
his ministry during Passover Jesus was teaching in the Temple. He was near to
King David’s Tomb which was south of where Jesus was teaching. Note what Jesus
said:

“And Jesus answered
and said, while he taught in the temple,

’How
say the scribes that Christ [the Messiah] is the Son of David? For David himself said by the Holy Ghost
[Spirit], The LORD said to my Lord, Sit you on my right hand,8till I make your enemies your footstool.’ David therefore himself calls
him Lord; and whence [how] is he
then his son? And the common people heard him gladly.’”

• Mark 12:35–37(also Matthew 22:41–46 and Luke 20:41–44)

Jesus cited a
portion of Psalm 110, a Davidic psalm. It is a prophecy of a future King who
would have rulership, a king who would also be a priest. The Jewish scribes
called him the Son of David. King David was the original object of this
prophetic Psalm, but in Jesus’ day there was an expectation by the scribes of a
messianic Son of David who would totally fulfill this Psalm. Jesus said this
prophecy applied to David who was the second “Lord” mentioned. The first “Lord”
was understood to be the cryptic “Son of David.” (Yes, it is complex.)

Psalm 110 is 7 verses long,
verses 1–4 are quoted here, substituting YHWH where it occurs in the Hebrew
text:

“A Psalm of David.YHWH
said unto my Lord [Adonai], Sit you at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.

YHWH
shall send the rod of your strength out of Zion: rule you in the midst of your enemies. Your people shall be willing in the day of your power, in
the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: you have the dew of your
youth.

YHWH
has sworn, and will not repent, You are a priest for ever[for the age] after the order of Melchizedek.”

• Psalm 110:1–4 KJV

The “You” in verse 4 is the second
“Lord,” the Adonai
of verse 1. But let us look at this Melchizedek that David is referring to:

“And the king of Sodom
went out to meet him after his return from the slaughter of Chedorlaomer, and of
the kings that were with him, at the valley of Shaveh, which is the king’s dale.
And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest[cohen] of the most high God.”

• Genesis 14:17–18

Why
does David in Psalm 110 refer to a priest “after the order of Melchizedek”? Melchizedek is mentioned one time only in Genesis 14:18 and nowhere else until
Psalm 110. It is important to note that he was both the king and“the priest of the most
high” for the city of Salem. Where was Salem? Salem was understood
in Jewish tradition as being Jerusalem, as several Targums tell us 9:

“And
Malki-zedek, king of Yerushelem, brought forth bread and wine (chemar),
and he was minister (meshamesh) before EL ILLAAH”

• Targum Onkelos on the Pentateuch, Genesis 14:18

The
same thing is said in the Targum Jerusalem and the Targum
Pseudo-Jonathan for Genesis 14:18. A conclusive biblical
identification of Salem comes from Psalm 76:2, a psalm of Asaph said to be
written in the time of David: “In Salem also is his tabernacle, and his
dwelling place in Zion.” When Psalm 76
was written, David was still alive, the
Temple had not yet been built, and the tabernacle of David held the Ark of
the Covenant(2 Samuel 6:17; Amos 9:11). The Psalm Targum on
Psalm 72:6 states: “And
his sanctuary has come to be in Jerusalem, and the dwelling of the house of his
holy presence is in Zion.” Salem is Jerusalem.

Was King David a Priest?

After Genesis 14:18,
Melchizedek is not mentioned again in Scripture until King David refers to the
priestly “order of Melchizedek” in Psalm 110:4, seemingly without any context.
However, there is a context but it is unrecognized. From some time after Genesis
14:18 until King David, control of Jerusalem (Salem) was in the hands of
Gentiles and not God’s people. When King David conquered Jerusalem, the city of
Jebus, the stronghold of Zion, he named it the “city of David” (2 Samuel 5:7, 9).
Salem, Zion, Jebus, and the City of David are all older names for the city of
Jerusalem.

Now this is important: when
he conquered and took possession of Jerusalem King David became
“the King of Salem” just like Melchizedek. In addition, by virtue of
becoming King of Salem, David also became a priest of the order of
Melchizedek, just as Psalm 110:4 tells us. David wrote about that fact in
Psalm 110 and he tells of God’s acknowledgement, approval, and promise.

Psalm 110 was also a
messianic prophecy about a future individual who also was to be seated at
God’s right hand, and would also be a priest “after the order of Melchizedek.” King and priest are the dual roles for the
person who was the object of Psalm 110. King David, as king and priest, and the
original object of Psalm 110, is buried at God’s right hand awaiting his
resurrection from the dead. 10
Christ also has a dual role as king and priest. He applied Psalm 110 to Himself
(Mark 14:61–64, above).

At Pentecost the apostle
Peter announced a fulfillment of Psalm 110 by reference to Jesus’ resurrection,
but he indicated that David was still dead and he would have to wait on Jesus
and His Second Coming for his fulfillment:

“Therefore
[David] being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of
the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he [God] would raise up Christ[Messiah] to sit on his [David’s]
throne; He seeing this before spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that his
soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus has
God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of
the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost [Spirit], he
has shed forth this, which you now see and hear [the tongues of fire and
miracle of the languages]. For David is not ascended into the
heavens: but he says himself,

‘The
LORD said unto my Lord, Sit you on my right hand, Until I make your foes your
footstool’ [quoting Psalm 110].

Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that
same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

• Acts 2:30–36

Peter
rightly claimed that Psalm 110 directly applied to Jesus’ resurrection and to
events at Pentecost. Peter summoned his strongest argument that Jesus Christ
was resurrected from the dead. Peter said that Psalm 110 was fulfilled at
that very moment with Jesus Christ (the Messiah) seated at the right hand of
the Father. David was dead, buried and in his tomb, still waiting for his
fulfillment. What David wrote in Psalm 110 did not apply at that time to
him. David was (and still is) buried at the right hand of God south of where the
holy of holies was located, above and west of the Gihon Springs in Jerusalem.

Notice that Peter did not quote verse 4 of Psalm 110. There was
no mention of Christ being a priest “after the order of Melchizedek,”
although Peter’s audience certainly knew that was part of Psalm 110.

The two-fold role of king
and priest in Psalm 110 referred prophetically to the coming Messiah, but its
original message was from God to David (postponed until Christ’s return).
Remember, the word Messiah means “anointed” and David was a Messiah by virtue of
his being the anointed king of Israel, and by right of conquest, he was the king
of Salem. David therefore had three roles as a Prophet, a Priest, and a King — a
complete “type” for the future Messiah on all points. Christ was and is today
the priest-king antitype. Psalm 110 therefore has a two-fold application, first
to David and then to the future Messiah Jesus Christ.

Combined Kingship and Priesthood

The concept
of kingship and priesthood combined in one person was not a strange or foreign
concept to the Jews of the 1st century, although they were uncertain
and confused about whether the Messiah would be a single person holding several
offices or several persons holding one office each. 11

Understand that most every
ancient king of every pagan nation was also a priest to some local religious
cult. In fact, for pagan religions that was
the normal custom for royalty to be priests. Kings were often priests of more
than one, indeed several, religious cults for their city or nation. This was
certainly true for the Roman emperors up until the time of Constantine.
Constantine’s nephew, Julian the Apostate, was the last Roman emperor to
publicly act as a priest for several Roman cults in the 4th century
AD.

Jewish
rulers of the Hasmonean dynasty for decades in the 2nd
and 1st centuries BC combined
kingly and priestly rule in Jerusalem. According to the Jewish historian
Josephus:

John Hyrcanus (135–104 BC) “was first made high priest, and afterward
king ...These Jews honored Hyrcanus as their high
priest and king, as did all the Jewish nation that dwelt as far as the
Euphrates” (Antiquities of the Jews 15:12, 15).

“And when Alexander [103–76 BC]
had been both king
and high priest twenty-seven years, he
died …” (Antiquities of the Jews 20:242).

Aristobulus II (67–63 BC) was sent to Rome
“… having been both
king and high priest for three years and six months” (Antiquities
of the Jews 14:97).

So, historically there is
no reason for King David not to be a priest, although with one
limitation, he could never be a Levitical priest because he does not qualify.
David was born into the tribe of Judah.

King David’s Priestly Sons … Were Not
Levites!

If David was qualified as a
priest in some manner by virtue of God’s oath and decree in Psalm 110, perhaps
there is evidence that David was actually a priest? There is an interesting
passage in 2 Samuel chapter 8 describing administrative appointments of men to
assist David in governing Israel. David’s sons are given an intriguing title for
their responsibilities. Read carefully, realizing that the generic word for
“priest” is cohen in Hebrew:

“And David reigned over all Israel; and David executed judgment and justice unto all his people. And Joab the son of Zeruiah was over the host; and
Jehoshaphat the son of Ahilud was recorder; And
Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Ahimelech the son of
Abiathar, werethe priests [cohenim, plural]; and Seraiah was the scribe; And
Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over both the
Cherethites and the Pelethites; and
David’s sons were chief rulers [cohenim, plural].”

• 2 Samuel 8:15–18

The King James
Version obscures the correct rendering in Hebrew: “David’s sons were priests,” cohenim, although
scholars have long recognized this fact. There are actually three other such
administrative lists:

“Four summaries,
pertaining to the time of the United Kingdom, mention both Levitical
high priests and, simultaneously, others who occupy a similarly designated
office of cohen (2 Samuel 8:18; 2 Samuel 20:26; 1 Kings 4:5; 1
Chronicles 18:16–17). Zabud son of Nathan was ‘principal officer’ under Solomon
(1 Kings 4:5, KJV). During the lapse between the earlier and later lists under
David, the occupancy of this second type of cohen office shifts from
David’s own sons (2 Samuel 8:18) to Ira the Jairite (2 Samuel 20:26).”

• “Priesthood,” 959b,Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament

In 2 Samuel 8:17 Zadok and
Ahimelech were properly called cohenim or priests in the usual sense;
both were of priestly families from the tribe of Levi. David’s sons in verse 18
were also called by the same term, cohenim, yet they are from the tribe
of Judah. 12
The phrase is clear and should be translated: “David’s sons were priests” which is completely different from the King
James translation of “chief rulers.” 13 The parallel passage in 1 Chronicles chapter 18 gives the same information except
the order is changed, and so is the job title of David’s sons:

“So David reigned over
all Israel, and executed judgment and justice among all his people. And
Joab the son of Zeruiah was over the host; and
Jehoshaphat the son of Ahilud, recorder. And
Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Abimelech the son of
Abiathar, were the priests; and
Shavsha was scribe; And
Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over the Cherethites
and the Pelethites; andthe sons of David were chief [rishon]
about the king.”

• 1 Chronicles 18:14–17

Comparing the relevant
parallel passages portions:

2 Samuel 8:18

1 Chronicles 18:17

“And
Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over both the Cherethites and the
Pelethites;

“And
David’s sons were priests
[cohenim,
plural].”

“And
Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over the Cherethites and the Pelethites;

“and
the sons of David were chief
[rishon,
first at hand] about the king.”

Note also that the sons were not identified.
Which sons of David? Consider for a moment that rather than there being a
problem, that both titles are correct and reflect the different roles that the
sons of David held when viewed from the perspectives of different writers. This
would mean that David’s sons were indeed priests (cohenim) as well as
close chief advisors to David. If King David himself was a priest
“after the order of
Melchizedek,” then it would be understandable for David as king to
delegate his sons and others to perform priestly functions for the Melchizedek
priesthood, whatever they might be.

What could those rituals
and duties have been? Look at the first occurrence of “priest” in the Bible to
see what that priest did. Look at Genesis 14:18:
“Melchizedek king of
Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest [cohen]
of the most high God.” We may infer that one of his priestly
duties had to do with bread and wine. Bread and wine help create a celebratory
communal meal that Melchizedek provided to Abram and the king of Sodom after
their victory. While the bread and the wine was served, notice what Melchizedek
did:

“And he
[Melchizedek] blessed him, and said, ‘Blessed be Abram of the most high God
[El],
possessor of heaven and earth: And blessed be the most high God
[El], which
has delivered your enemies into your hand.’”

• Genesis 14:19–20

Does the bread, the wine,
and a blessing in celebration bring anything to mind? Indeed, it is similar in
some ways with the Lord’s Supper in Matthew 26:26–29; Mark 14:22–25; and Luke
22:15–20 which has a blessing, bread, and wine. The difference is that the
Lord’s Supper was a solemn and not a celebratory occasion (1 Corinthians
11:23–34). Brant Pitre believes that Jesus was performing the Lord’s Supper as a
Melchizedek priest, blessing the bread and the wine and His disciples before His
crucifixion, but looking forward to His resurrection and enthronement. Pitre may
very well be correct.

Other Non-Levitical Priests

There are other non-Levites
who are put forth as being priests. During Solomon’s reign a friend of the king
is listed as a priest [cohen]:

“And Azariah the son of
Nathan was over the officers [natsab, not cohen]: and Zabud the son of Nathan was
principal officer
[cohen],
and the king’s friend.”

• 1 Kings 4:5

Zabud was likely the son of
Nathan the prophet. Nathan supervised Solomon’s education (2 Samuel
12:25) and had a prominent role in Solomon’s
ascension to the throne of Israel after David’s death, anointing Solomon as King (1 Kings chapter
1). Nathan and his son Zabud are from the tribe of Judah, not Levi, yet
Zabud is listed as a priest, a cohen.14

There is one more
non-Levitical priest or cohen. As mentioned above in the “Priesthood”
Theological Wordbook quotation, 2 Samuel chapter 20 gives another list of
administrative leaders under King David, similar in form to those in 2 Samuel
8:18 and 1 Chronicles 18:17 above.

“Now Joab was over all
the host of Israel: and
Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over the Cherethites
and over the Pelethites: And
Adoram was over the tribute: and
Jehoshaphat the son of Ahilud was recorder: And
Sheva was scribe: and
Zadok and Abiathar were the priests[cohenim, plural]:
And Ira also the Jairite was a chief ruler[cohen] about David.”

• 2 Samuel 20:23–26

This Ira was said
to be a cohen, a priest. He is not mentioned anywhere else in Scripture;
the only thing known about him is that he was a Jairite. This may refer to an
ancestor from the tribe of Manasseh (Numbers 32:41), or it may refer to the town
where he lived (Joshua 13:30). Whether Jairite is an ancestral or a geographical
term, there is no indication that Ira was a Levite.

To sum up, the word
cohen in Hebrew is rendered in the King James Version some 700+ times as
“priest.” Pagan priests are called cohenim. According to the law of
Moses, the priests of Israel could only come from the tribe of Levi. Yet there
are three instances when non-Levites are termed “priests,” 2 Samuel 8:18, 2
Samuel 20:26, and 1 Kings 4:5.

Most commentaries briefly
take note of the seemingly out of place “priests” particularly in 2 Samuel 8:18,
but they most always accept the parallel reading of 1 Chronicles 18:17 and go on
to the next verse. Those who consider the matter simply state that “priests” is
an odd rendering, but that cohen and cohenim in those few
instances simply mean administrative officials and not “priests” with religious
ritual functions.

The solution to the matter
of non-Levitical priests is that they were not priests “of Israel,” but were
cohenim of the Melchizedek priesthood that functioned outside of Mosaic
ritual law, constituting a separate priestly system outside of the Law of Moses.
That priesthood was personal, responsible not to the nation, but to the king
alone. It was limited only to whoever would be the single king combining the
aspects of Melchizedek (meaning “king of righteousness”) and the King of Salem
(meaning “king of peace”). These non-Levitical priests operated on behalf of the
king (David’s sons and Ira for King David, and Zabud on for Solomon) who were
the source of the priestly authority. David’s sons, Ira, and Zabud had no
priestly authority of themselves. Their authority was transitory, derivative,
according to the whim of their sovereign.

Therefore, the priestly
authority only came down to David’s heir, the one who became the King of Salem,
which was Solomon (whose name means “peace”) or to Ira or to Zabud. The
authority originated with Melchizedek, went through David, through Solomon,
finally to Christ, in whom the identification is the strongest and ultimately
intended.

In the Book of Hebrews we
find that this is indeed the case regarding Christ. There certainly was a
priesthood “after the
order of Melchizedek” in Jerusalem during the reign of David and
probably Solomon. There is nothing to indicate that it continued
beyond that time until Christ. We just do
not know. Once the Temple was constructed by Solomon and the Levitical
priesthood began its regular operations as set forth by King David and
the prophet Nathan, perhaps a secondary non-Levitical Melchizedek priesthood
was no longer needed or mentioned.

The Branch as King and Priest

Much later in the kingdom
of Judah Jeremiah gave a prophecy about a King, a descendant of David called
“a righteous Branch” (Remember as you read these passages that the name or title “Melchizedek” is
comprised of melch-tzedek which means “king of righteousness”):

“Behold, the days come,
says YHWH, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King
shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the
earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this
is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS
[or “YHWH is righteousness”].”

• Jeremiah 23:5–6

“In
those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to
grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in
the land. In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely:
and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The LORD our righteousness.”

• Jeremiah 33:15–16

Still later Zechariah
prophesies about a “branch” whose rule would be as king and as priest:

“Then take silver and gold, and make crowns, and set them upon the head of
Joshua [= Jesus, “YHWH saves”] the son of Josedech [“YHWH is
righteous”],
the high priest; Thus speaks YHWH of hosts, saying, ‘Behold the man whose
name is The BRANCH; and [1] he shall
grow up out [literally “branch out”] of his place, and
[2] he
shall build the temple of YHWH: Even

[3] he
shall build the temple of YHWH; and[4] he shall
bear the glory, and[5] [he] shall sit and rule upon his throne; and
[6] he
shall be a priest upon his throne: and

the
counsel of peace shall be between them both [both thrones].”

• Zechariah 6:12–13

This
passage tells of a man called “the Branch” who
sits and rules from a throne. While he rules as king at the same time He
shall also sit upon the throne as a priest. Christ fulfills both
these Branch prophecies as the antitype, and particularly the Zechariah 6:12–13
passage. He fulfills some at His first coming when He grew up and when He built
the Temple of His body. Later He will perform the last tasks. In other words,
the tasks [1] “he shall grow up out of his place” and
[2] “he shall
build the temple” were fulfilled when Jesus was
on earth. The four last tasks, [3] through
[6], are at present time preparing in heaven. They will be fulfilled in a
final way on earth during Christ’s 1,000 years reign.

Jesus and the Temple of His Body

As I mentioned earlier
Jesus did not perform any physical priestly functions on earth relative to
the physical Temple of God. He was, after all, not a Levitical priest. His
priesthood was from another source, “after the order of Melchizedek.” In fact, He did not need to be a Levitical priest because His own body was a
Temple of God in a sense more important and real than any physical Tabernacle of
the past, or Temple of stone and wood that existed in Jesus’ day. Every physical
action that Jesus did in life was performed with relation to
“the Temple of His
body”:

“And the Jews’ Passover
was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem, And found in the temple those that
sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: And when he
had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the
sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the
tables; And said unto them that sold doves, ‘Take these things hence; make not
my Father’s house an house of merchandise.’ And his disciples remembered that it
was written, ‘The zeal of your house has eaten me up.’

Then
answered the Jews and said unto him, ‘What sign show you to us, seeing that you
do these things?’ Jesus answered and said unto them, ‘Destroy this temple, and
in three days I will raise it up.’ Then said the Jews, ‘Forty and six years was
this temple in building, and will you rear it up in three days?’

But he spoke of the temple of his body. When therefore he was risen from the
dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they
believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.”

• John 2:13–22

How
was it possible for Jesus Christ’s body to be a Temple of God? It was possible because God’s Holy Spirit was resident within
Him, and God’s Spirit in Him was unlimited:

“For he whom God has
sent speaks the words of God: for God gives not the Spirit by measure unto
him. The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into his
hand. He that believes on the Son has everlasting life …”

• John 3:34–36

God’s Holy Spirit
is so energetic, so powerful, and so life-giving, that it makes Christ’s
resurrected body still to be considered a Temple of God. Christ’s resurrection
from the dead was a literal rebuilding of that Temple into a new body of flesh
and bone, without blood, comprised of spirit.

Your body is also a temple:
“What? know you not
that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost [Spirit]
which is
in you, which you have of God, and you are not your own?” (1 Corinthians 6:19). In spite of what you may think, you do not
own your body. As Paul said, it is “not your own.”
You are part of Christ’s body (Romans 12:2-5; 1 Corinthians 12:12,
27; Ephesians 1:22–23, 5:30; Colossians 1:18). The future New Jerusalem is
described by the apostle John: “And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God
Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it” (Revelation
21:22). This will occur in the near future to us.

After His
resurrection Jesus explained to his apostles all the prophecies from the Old
Testament that were fulfilled (Luke 24:44–48 and Acts 1:3). Over time the
apostles came to understand that the physical rituals were no longer necessary.
As long as the Temple existed the Jewish Christians could continue to observe
those rituals (which they did do), but the rituals were not imposed on Gentile
believers (Acts 15:28–29). All Temple rituals ceased in 70 AD with the destruction of the Temple.

The symbolic act of
cleansing the Temple by Jesus, along with His actions at the Last Supper, were
designed to replace the Temple as the symbolic focus of Judaism. His
identification of His body as the Temple of God combined with the ritual of the
bread and the wine at the Last Supper constitute to some scholars a priestly
initiation ritual.

“The Temple Action [the
cleansing of the Temple] and the Last Supper, taken
together, indicated that Jesus was in effect intending to replace the Temple, as
the symbolic focus of Judaism, with his own newly instituted quasi-cultic meal.”

“[T]he
overturning of the moneychangers’ tables represents an act of rejection of the
most important rite of the Israelite cult, the daily whole-offering, and,
therefore, a statement that there is a means of atonement other than the daily
whole offering, which is now null. Then what was to take the place of the
daily whole-offering? It was to be the rite of the Eucharist: table for table,
whole offering for whole offering.”

Indeed, Brant Pitre shows that the
pattern of several of Jesus’ interactions with His disciples in His
ministry correspond to what YHWH did at Mount Sinai in ways that
cannot be coincidental. In Exodus 24:1–11, for example,
people are grouped into specifically numbered group sets. Similarly numbered
group sets of people appear in the Gospels:

Priestly Hierarchy of Mount Sinai, Exodus 24:1–11, pre-Levitical

Jesus and His Disciples (in the Gospels)

Moses

1 The high priest, Aaron

3 Aaron, Nadab, Abihu

12 Twelve Pillars / “Young Men” of the Twelve Tribes

70 Elders
of Israel

Jesus

1 Peter, chief of the Apostles

3 Peter, James, and John (all at Transfiguration and each is
renamed)

12 Twelve apostles of the Twelve Tribes

70 Appointed and sent out (to preach and perform exorcisms)

Pitre’s conclusion at the end of his SBL paper was that Jesus
performed the Last Supper under His authority as a Melchizedek priest, not as a
Levitical priest. Hence, Jesus used the bread and the wine in the Gospels as
Melchizedek did, as a thank offering.

The Book of Hebrews

Only in the Book of Hebrews
is the nature of Christ’s status as high priest set out in detail. 17
The title “Christ” (meaning “anointed” or Messiah) is connected with the status
of high priest explicitly in Hebrews 2:17, 3:1, 4:14, 5:5, 10, 6:20, 7:26, 8:1,
3, 9:11, 25, 10:21 and 13:11–12. Other terms such as “Son of Man” and “Son of
God” are used in Hebrews to refer to Christ Jesus in an all inclusive manner. In
fact Son of Man and Son of God have the same meaning in the Book of Hebrews and
appear to be used interchangeably. Elsewhere in the New Testament the idea of
Jesus being a high priest is never denied, but there is no direct statement
about it. In the Book of Hebrews that changes dramatically. There, Jesus is
the Son of God, the high priest:

“Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the
heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we
have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our
infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without
sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain
mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.”

• Hebrews 4:14–16

This is the
function of a high priest, to approach God, advocate for the people, and in the
case of Jesus, to help us obtain mercy and grace when we need it most. Christ
also mediates by representing His righteousness to God as our righteousness.

As Professor Buchanan
notes, the structure of Hebrews is that of an extended commentary on Psalm 110
(with occasional diversions), from the beginning in chapter 1 through to the end
of chapter 12. 18
Psalm 110 is quoted or clearly alluded to 12 times, often elaborating on the
text.

Hebrews Chapters 1 and
2

The author of Hebrews in
the first two chapters corrects the mistaken understandings that his audience
has about the relationship of God and His Son to angels. Then He discusses the Son
as high priest:

“For verily he
[the Son] took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Wherefore in all things it behooved [was necessary for]
him to be made like unto his brethren, that he
[the Son] might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to
make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself has
suffered being tempted, he is able to succor [relieve]
them that are tempted.

Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the
Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; Who was faithful
to him [God the Father] that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house. For this man
[Jesus] was
counted worthy of more glory than Moses ...”

• Hebrews 2:16–3:3

In his book, Essentials of New Testament Doctrine,19
chapter 31, beginning with the second paragraph, Dr. Martin identifies who this
individual named Melchizedek was. He does so by examining Psalm 110:1:
“A
Psalm of David. The LORD [YHWH] said unto my Lord [Adonai],
‘Sit you at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”

This other “Lord” was a member of the divine hierarchy reckoned as being of
the order or rank of Melchizedek. Paul in Hebrews said this Melchizedek was
likened (in matters of genealogical records) to be the
“Son of God” in heaven because there was no earthly record of Him having any human
descent (Hebrews 7:3). Being placed in the category of a
“Son of God” shows that Melchizedek (the King of Righteousness and Peace) was not an
angel. Indeed, He was so powerful that David said He sat on the right hand
of YHVH in heaven (Psalm 110:1) which throughout Hebrews (1:3, 8:1, 10:12,
12:2) as well as in Mark 16:19; Colossians 3:1; and 1 Peter 3:22 is a
position reserved for Christ Jesus.

The biblical records likened Melchizedek, in Paul’s view, to
“THE Son of God” (not simply
“A Son
of God”). This title was afforded Him because Paul said there
was no human account showing Melchizedek’s father or mother, or of Him
having descent from a human, nor was there any death record of Him like
humans normally have. Melchizedek was not like a normal human being born on
this earth when Abraham met Him. Rather, He was a heavenly
“Son of God.” In summation, Melchizedek is simply a name of Christ before His
incarnation and again after His resurrection. It is the name Christ holds
in His role of being a priest for the entire human race. But Christ was
at first (and still is) the chief of the heavenly group of divine beings who
make up the Family of God. He sat on the right hand side of YHVH because He
was God’s firstborn Son (Colossians 1:15) of all the
“Sons of God” in heaven.

The
bottom line is this: You can go to every occurrence of Melchizedec in Hebrews
5:6, 10, 6:20, 7:1, 10-11, 15, 17, and 21, and insert “the Son” into the sentence.
Performing such an exercise will greatly expand your understanding. Then read
Mark 16:19; Colossians 3:1; and 1 Peter 3:22, and each verse relating to the
resurrected Christ at the right hand of the Father: Matthew 22:44, 26:64; Mark
12:36, 14:62, 16:19; Luke 20:41–44, 22:69; Acts 2:33f, 5:31, 7:55-56; Romans 8:34;
Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:3, 13, 8:1, 10:12, 12:2; and 1 Peter
3:22. Each of these passages add nuance to what Hebrews says regarding
Melchizedek and Psalm 110. 20
You will gain immense knowledge about what happens around God’s throne, and the
Father’s and Christ’s relationship to you.

“Seeing then that we have a great high priest,
that is passed into the
heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have
not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities;
but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.”

• Hebrews 4:14–15

“And
no man takes this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as
was Aaron. So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but
he that said unto him, ‘You are my Son, to day have I begotten you [citing Psalm 2:7].’ As he said also in another place, ‘You are a
priest for ever [for the age] after the order of Melchisedec’
[citing Psalm 110:4].”

• Hebrews 5:4–6

Now look how Christ as high
priest does not glorify himself, but His Father YHWH. He glorifies God by
praying, supplicating, crying, even fearing, being obedient, suffering, obeying,
and by being perfected (Hebrews 5:7–9). It is important to
realize that Christ prayed and made supplications to His Father with
crying and tears, not just at the Garden of Gethsemane, but
“in the days of his flesh.” Jesus knew what was in store for
Him. Yet He also knew that God was “able to save him from death.”

Notice that
Jesus, the Son of God, our great high priest, is sympathetic to us in every way,
even experiencing suffering and death as we do. Second, notice that he has
“compassion on
the ignorant” and those who are straying. This is
a great comfort to us who wonder and grieve about unbelieving relatives and
friends because He, as our high priest, has already made an offering for sin
that is acceptable and pleasing to God. That offering was His own body and
blood, Himself as the Lamb of God. In so doing He is honored, but God gets the
glory. When Christ was in flesh on earth He suffered and cried because of the
death He so greatly feared, as we all fear death. Death was His enemy, just as
it is ours (1 Corinthians 15:26). His priesthood is “after the order of Melchisedec.”

Jesus did
not become high priest of the Melchisedek order again until after His
resurrection, not until He entered within
the veil of the Tabernacle in heaven. That took place when He ascended to His Father (Hebrews 6:19–20).
After He sprinkled the blood on the altar of the tabernacle in heaven, then He
was formally seated at the right hand of the Father. Not until then did
He become a priest “after the order of Melchisedec.” He
“for us entered,” on our behalf.

Hebrews
7:1–10 is an extended discussion about Melchizedek, going beyond what is stated
in Genesis 14:18 and discussing nuances and meanings of various aspects of his
interactions. Think “Christ” when you read “Melchizedek.” In Genesis there is no
hint of a priestly “order” of Melchizedek, there is just Melchizedek, the
individual who interacts with Abraham, who when He became flesh through Mary was
named Jesus. These passages should make excellent sense:

“Now of the things
which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on
the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; A minister of the
sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.”

• Hebrews 8:1–2

“For
Christ [Messiah] is
not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the
true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
… but now once in the end of the world has he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. … Christ [Messiah]
was
once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.”

• Hebrews 9:24–28

“But
this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the
right hand of God; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his
footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
sanctified.”

• Hebrews 10:12–14

Conclusion

I began
this article with three questions about Christ. Knowing who Melchizedek is gives
us answers:

1.
How was He designated to be high priest? Christ can be so designated because God called Him to be so (Hebrews 5:4–6).

2.
Why is He high priest? Christ is high priest to glorify God, not Himself
(Hebrews 5:5) whereby He is bringing many sons to glory (Hebrews 2:10).

3.
What does He do as high priest? He has accomplished (past tense) His
purpose as High Priest by being the Lamb of God, and by His resurrection and
approach to the throne of God He has sprinkled His blood on the altar before
God’s throne to cover our sins and as a result we have been made sinless. By His
righteousness we are made righteous. He continues (present tense) to be a
mediator between God and man, from our viewpoint he is “the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy
2:5–6). We are safe and our salvation is sure.

David Sielaff, February 2009

1
For Jesus as prophet see Matthew 13:57, 16:14, 21:11; Mark 6:4; Luke
7:16, 40, 9:19, 24:19; and John 4:44, 6:14–15. Several verses speak to
the fact that Jesus is a King. A definitive passage is John 18:36–37 at
His trial before Pontius Pilate:

“Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this
world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants
fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my
kingdom not from hence.’ Pilate therefore said unto him, ‘Are you a
king then?’ Jesus answered, ‘You say that I am a king. To this end
was I born …’”

5
In the Gospel of John the entire focus of is to present Jesus as the
Lamb of God, as shown in Dr. Martin’s article “The Apostle John, the
Lamb, and the Spirit” at
http://www.askelm.com/doctrine/d070701.htm. As the priest He is
performing the sacrifice; as the Lamb He is the object of the sacrifice.
John’s presenting Jesus as the Lamb is very different from how the first
three Gospels portray Him. (Both portrayals are correct.) The visions of
John that make up the Book of Revelation often use the theme of Christ
as the Lamb of God. Christ’s sacrifice was that He
“died for
all” (2 Corinthians 5:14). See 1 Peter 1:18–19 and the 27
references in the Book of Revelation to the Lamb (or “little lamb”) of
God.

6
They condemned Him in spite of what Nicodemus said early in Jesus’
ministry, “Rabbi,
we know (we, the religious rulers and teachers of
Israel know) that you are a teacher come from God:
for no man can do these miracles that you do, except God be with him” (John 3:2). They had that knowledge, that understanding, yet they still
thought Him guilty of death.

8
The expression “right hand” can mean
“south.” Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon
(Unabridged), 3962, p. 411: “south, because
when facing east the right hand is toward the south.” See 1 Samuel 23:19, 24; Ezekiel 16:46; Psalms 89:13, 107:3, 9,
and “The Location and Future Discovery of King David’s Tomb” at
http://www.askelm.com/temple/t061001.htm.

9
A Targum is a set of Aramaic interpretive paraphrases of Old Testament
texts.

10
See note 8. God faces east from His Temple in Jerusalem. David is buried
just south of the southern wall at God’s right hand.

11
Again, see Dr. Martin’s “Types of Messiah in the Old Testament,” note 1
above.

12
It is interesting that we do not know which sons of David
participated as priests. There were at least two. David’s son Absalom
erected a pillar at the Kings Dale near Jerusalem (2 Samuel 18:18) which
may reflect a mention of his priestly service, but uncertain. The Kings
Dale is mentioned only one other time, in Genesis 14:18, the location
where Melchizedek met Abram.

13
There are no Hebrew manuscript variants for any claim of textual
ambiguity. The Greek LXX translates cohenim from the Hebrew into
Greek as “chief rulers.”

14
After Israel separated from Judah, Jeroboam, first king of the ten
tribes of Israel, appointed his own priests in the northern kingdom of
Israel, none of whom were Levites (1 Kings 12:31):

“And he made an house of high places,
and made
priests [cohen] of the lowest of the people,
which were not of the sons of Levi.”

17
See Dr. Martin’s article “The Book of Hebrews” at
http://www.askelm.com/doctrine/d040901.htm. Several scholars
classify Hebrews more like a homily or a sermon than an epistle, both
because it does not have parts of a normal epistle and because of its
internal structure. Prof. George Wesley Buchanan considers the Book of
Hebrews to be:

“… the finest
literature in its class. It is the best commentary on Scripture; it is
the best legal argument; it is the best midrash, or the best sermon
every read.”

See Buchanan’s The
Book of Hebrews: Its Challenge from Zion (Eugene, OR: Wipf and
Stock, 2006), pp. 1–5. A midrash is a commentary on Scripture.